A resolution expressing the sense of the United States Senate that President Obama should issue a statement regarding spying on His Holiness, Pope Francis.

Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 458, I call up the bill (H.R. 3547) to extend the application of certain space launch liability provisions through

2014, with the Senate amendments thereto, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Madam Speaker, I have a motion at the desk.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the consideration of H.R. 3547, and that I may include tabular material on the same.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I rise today to bring to the floor, Madam Speaker, an amendment to the Senate amendment to H.R. 3547. This is the consolidated appropriations package that will fund the government for the remainder of the 2014 fiscal year.

This omnibus contains all 12 regular appropriations bills for fiscal year 2014--funding every aspect of the Federal Government, from our national defense to critical transportation infrastructure to the education of our kids. In total, it provides $1.012 trillion in discretionary funding--the same level delineated in the Ryan-Murray budget agreement.

I am pleased that Senator Mikulski and I were able to come to this fair, bipartisan agreement on funding the government. Although our differences were many and our deadlines short, we were able to come together to draft a solid piece of legislation that meets the guidelines of the Ryan-Murray agreement and keeps the government open.

I understand that not everyone will like everything in this bill. That is the nature of compromise. But I believe this legislation reflects the best possible outcome. We made responsible choices to realign the Nation's funding priorities, targeting precious tax dollars to where they are needed the most.

We have continued the 4-year trend of reducing Federal discretionary spending, making a total of $165 billion in cuts since fiscal year 2010. In fact, this is the fourth straight year that we have cut discretionary spending. That has not happened since the Korean war. And we have remained committed on our side to our Republican principles: reducing regulatory burdens, fortifying our national security, and enforcing stringent oversight on the executive branch.

Throughout the bill, we have maintained pro-life policies and protected Second Amendment rights. We have made sure that this bill provides no new funding for ObamaCare, and have even cut existing ObamaCare funds to the tune of over $1 billion.

The Appropriations Committees in the House and Senate, working side- by-side, went line-by-line through thousands of agencies and the 12 regular appropriations bills to make sure that each program was weighed individually and received a funding level that supports their most current needs.

We have prioritized funding for the most important and effective programs and reduced lower-priority programs at

the same time. For example, we did not include any funding for high- speed rail or three new Department of Homeland Security headquarter buildings, but we targeted funding to essential national defense activities, critical law enforcement programs, and lifesaving efforts, such as medical research.

This bill also includes an important provision fixing the Bipartisan Budget Act to ensure that those who have given the most in military service, the approximately 630,000 medically retired personnel and survivor benefit plan recipients, our disabled veterans, receive their full yearly cost-of-living increase.

Before I close, Madam Speaker, I would like to take a moment to thank the many, many people who were integral in getting this bill to the floor today.

First, I thank the ranking member of the Appropriations Committee, Mrs. Lowey. Thanks to her partnership and her dedication, we were able to wrap up this omnibus by the deadline, and I know her drive extends to our next challenge--the 2015 bills that we will start next month. In fact, the passage of this bill will allow the Appropriations Committee to get back to regular order, as they say, get the train back on track so that this coming year we can do 12 individual bills brought to the floor separately, as is the practice and is required. I want to thank her for her leadership in helping us get to that point.

Secondly, our counterparts in the Senate, whose open-minded approach to negotiations led to many honest and reasonable discussions throughout the many stages of this process. I don't know any appropriations bill that has gone through as many reasonable tests and, I think, wise decision processes as went into this bill. So I appreciated the work of the gentlelady on the Senate side, the chairman of the committee there, Ms. Mikulski, and Senator Shelby of Alabama. We had wonderful times at Christmas and New Year's. Next time, as much as I love these people, I would rather be with my family.

Lastly, I want to thank the members and the staffs of the committee. They gave up countless hours of family time at Christmas, New Year's, and during the holidays in order to complete this bill. They really are the A-team. I am lucky to have all of them working for this committee. Without their hard work, expertise on the issues, and their commitment to this legislation, we would not be here today. We should all be grateful for their service. I hope that you will say something to them as you pass.

I would particularly like to recognize the clerk of the Agriculture Subcommittee, Martin Delgado. After 16 years, this is his last bill with the committee. How fortunate we have been to have him until the end. No one knows the ins and outs of Agriculture appropriations like he does. He is a true expert in every sense of the word. We will miss him dearly and wish him Godspeed.

Let me also mention the chief clerk of the committee, Will Smith, who sits beside me. He has led the effort from day one. He has put in untold numbers of hours--day and night, weekends, all-nights--to bring us to this point. He has been a great staff leader. He has done a fantastic job. I want you to say something to him.

On the other side of the aisle, his counterpart, David Pomerantz has been a terrific asset to the committee and to piecing together this very difficult, complex bill. We want to say thank you to David Pomerantz for his great work.

Jim Kulikowski, who also sits beside me, the number two clerk in the committee, has been invaluable in getting us to this point.

Madam Speaker, in closing, I would like to once again remind our colleagues that providing funding for our Federal Government is one of our chief duties as Members of Congress. In fact, I think it is the chief duty, one that we can't shirk. The people elected us to fulfill this duty and govern. To govern, you have got to pass these funding bills for the government.

As we pass these funding bills, the imprint of Members of Congress on these funding bills directs agencies of the executive branch to follow the will of the people represented here in this body. So this bill is a reflection of the need for Members of Congress, under the Constitution, to decide how and when and why money is spent by the executive branch. The people elected us to fulfill that duty, and this bill does just that. Three and a half months into the fiscal year, I would say it was just about past time that we pass this legislation.

So I urge an ``aye'' vote on the omnibus. We can send it to the Senate today for their approval and get it to the President for his signature as soon as possible. Certainly, before Saturday.

With that, Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf), a very hardworking and longtime classmate of mine, chairman of the Commerce, Justice, Science Subcommittee.

(Mr. WOLF asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Madam Speaker, most of the provisions of this bill were written by the subcommittees on the House and Senate side and worked out between them. One of the chief writers of the bill is Rodney Frelinghuysen, the new chairman of the Defense Subcommittee of the Appropriations Committee. His part of the bill was, by far, the biggest of anybody else's. It was only $572 billion.

I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Frelinghuysen) to explain that.

(Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Latham), the chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Aderholt), the distinguished chairman of the Agriculture Subcommittee on Appropriations.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Idaho (Mr. Simpson), the chairman of the Energy and Water Subcommittee on Appropriations.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Crenshaw), the subcommittee chairman that drafted the Financial Services part of the omnibus bill.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Carter), the author of the Homeland Security portion of the omnibus bill, the chairman of the Homeland Security Subcommittee.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert), the chairman of the Interior portion of the bill.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith), the chairman of the House Science Committee.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Dent), a member of our committee.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Herrera Beutler).

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Latta) for the purpose of a colloquy.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Yes, the gentleman from Ohio is correct. The bill includes additional funding for flood control studies, and the report direction encourages the Corps to consider economic development and job growth when allocating these funds to individual studies.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

If I were allowed to make reference to people in the gallery--which I am not allowed to--I would say we have over my right shoulder up there most of the staff of this committee who are responsible for this bill. If I were allowed to say so, I would want to congratulate and thank them for giving us their Christmas and New Year's and all of the heart and desire they have to bring us to where we are.

Madam Speaker, in closing, when you think about this room, this hallowed Chamber where we came together during times of crisis and in times of non-crisis, a place you can almost hear the words echo of MacArthur addressing this body, or Churchill, or President Wilson, and you remember that this is the Chamber where we all came together to survive the Depression, world wars beginning with I, and the dire days of World War II, and all the other wars, this is the place where the Nation found itself coming together.

I can't think of a more satisfying time that I have had in this Chamber in these years than now in helping bring together across the aisle and across the Capitol Members of the Senate and the House, doing what we are supposed to do, and that is governing and deciding how we want to spend the taxpayers' dollars for the country. I want to thank all who took part in that. It has been a great chore.

We had 30 days to put together a trillion-plus-dollar spending bill, get it approved in the Senate, controlled by another body, and to be signed by the President, another party from ours, on this side. It has been a great pleasure working with all of you.

This bill is not perfect, I hate to tell you, but it is a good one, and it represents the best traditions of the country in coming together, recognizing our common problems, then finding a way out of it.

I want to thank Mrs. Lowey and our colleagues in the Senate for all the work they put into it, and I urge an ``aye'' vote.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

At the outset, I want to thank the gentleman from Kentucky, Chairman Rogers, for the cooperative way he has guided this committee. It has truly been a pleasure for me to work with him and his staff.

As we all know, Mr. Speaker, funding to keep the government operating expires at midnight tonight. It is my sincere hope that we can avoid the antics of last year, when a vocal minority in this body was able to hold the entire government hostage for reasons they

couldn't articulate. It wasn't fair to the American people, and I hope we never have to go through it again.

Throughout this process, my goal has been to avoid another costly shutdown and make adequate investments to grow the economy, enhance our security, and protect the most vulnerable among us.

I remain disappointed, Mr. Speaker, that the House majority decided to leave out the agreement reached on the Department of Homeland Security. The decision reflects their political calculation on immigration policy.

I believe my chairman was right when he rebuffed efforts to restrict the President's executive orders on immigration on a must-pass appropriations bill. But forcing these important agencies--Customs and Border Protection, the U.S. Secret Service, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Transportation Security Administration--into a 2-month continuing resolution was unnecessary and unfortunate. The short-term CR creates uncertainty and will limit the Department's ability to make important decisions on procurements, hiring, and on new initiatives we all support.

I will now enter into the Record a letter from Homeland Security Secretary Johnson outlining the problems with funding the Department through a CR.

U.S. Department

of Homeland Security,

Washington, DC, December 5, 2014.

Hon. Nita Lowey,

Ranking Member, Committee on Appropriations, House of

Representatives, Washington, DC.

Dear Representative Lowey: As the United States Congress

addresses the FY 2015 appropriations for the Federal

Government, I ask for your support for a full annual

appropriation for the Department.

As you know, a Continuing Resolution is not the most

effective way to fund the government. Short-term funding

measures are disruptive, create uncertainty, and impede

efficient resource planning and execution. They inherently

slow down day-to-day operations, force leadership to make

short-sighted versus long-term decisions, and adversely

impact operations in a manner that is hard to overcome if

full funding is provided later in the year. Additionally, the

disruption to acquisitions, the slow-down of our business

processes, such as contracting and hiring, and the effect of

many other elements driven by short-term funding have a

direct impact on effectiveness of the Department.

While a short-term Continuing Resolution has impacts across

the Department, I wanted to highlight some specific areas

that are most concerning.

Securing our Borders--Investments to strengthen border

security with new border surveillance technology for the Rio

Grande Valley would not be available.

Grants Funding--State and local municipalities would not

receive key preparedness grant funding, such as the State

Homeland Security Program and Urban Areas Security Initiative

grants.

National Security Cutter--the U.S. Coast Guard will not

have funding to award the contract for NSC #8, the

centerpiece of the Coast Guard's Fleet, supporting the

maritime homeland security and defense missions. This could

result in the expiration of the agreed upon offer by the

prime and sub-contractors, subsequently leading to a delay of

delivery of NSC #8 and most likely resulting in increased

costs.

National Rio and Agro Defense Facility--Awarding the final

segment of the construction contract for the National Bio and

Agro Defense Facility could be problematic. Uncertainties in

the appropriations process have introduced risks to Kansas

providing the gift funds to support the May 2015 award date.

Appropriation of the final $300 million is necessary for

Kansas to provide the $202 million in gift funds.

In closing, I would like to thank the Congress for the

continued support provided to the Department. However, I must

also stress the need for an annual appropriation based on the

FY 2015 President's Budget and the Committee markups

accomplished earlier this summer.

Identical letters have been sent to the Chairman of the

House Appropriations Committee, and to the Chairwoman and

Ranking Member of the Senate Appropriations Committee. Should

you require further information, please do not hesitate to

contact me or the Department's Chief Financial Officer, Chip

Fulghum.

Sincerely,

Jeh Charles Johnson.

My colleague from North Carolina, David Price, the ranking member of the Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee, was unsuccessful in his attempt at the Rules Committee to restore full- year funding for this bill. I authored an amendment to strike two very controversial provisions--one to strike a rider related to swaps under the Dodd-Frank law, the other to strike a provision raising contribution limits to political parties. These provisions are divisive and unnecessary. They should be removed.

The 11 other spending bills included in this package are a mix of wins and losses. I was very pleased that most of the worst riders were dropped, including those on the Affordable Care Act, the Clean Air Act, and those preventing full implementation of new reforms to the Federal school lunch program.

Statutory budget caps essentially kept all discretionary programs at a hard freeze, but I am pleased we were able to prioritize a few key items, such as the National Institutes of Health and food safety at the Food and Drug Administration. Another very modest but very important increase is provided for afterschool programs, many of which suffered steep cuts under sequestration and have still not made up those shortfalls.

I am also pleased the final agreement provides $500 million for the Department of Transportation's TIGER program to fund major surface transportation projects, including bridges, transit, and passenger rail.

To keep firearms out of the hands of those who shouldn't possess them, the National Instant Criminal Background Check System will receive an increase of $14.5 million. This important investment was achieved because Members on both sides of the aisle recognize how crucial this money is for States to improve their submission of records into the background check system.

The appropriations package includes much of the administration's request to respond to the deadly Ebola crisis, $5.4 billion. We must ensure that all of those tasked with being on the front lines fighting this disease, from local hospitals to Federal agencies, have what they need. We all recognize how the ease of international travel has changed the way we must respond to contagious diseases. I have confidence in our health care system, the Centers for Disease Control, and the fantastic hospitals that stepped up to take and treat the patients with Ebola. But we should do whatever we can to stop the disease where it is the most deadly. The funding provided will allow research to ramp up to treat and hopefully develop a vaccine for Ebola.

Before I close, I would like to thank the committee staff for their tireless work, particularly David Pomerantz and Lesley Turner, who worked closely with Will and the entire Appropriations staff.

I am very pleased the Appropriations Committee was able to come together on a package to fund 11 of the 12 spending bills. But, again, I wish it had been on all 12 bills and only dealt with issues related to appropriations.

I will reiterate that the funding contains many things I wish had had a different outcome. I fought throughout the conference, for example, to get rid of the swaps language. It does not belong on an appropriations bill. The Reid-Boehner provision to increase by tenfold the limits on contributions to political parties is excessive and also does not belong on this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price), the ranking member of the Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano), the distinguished ranking member of the Financial Services Subcommittee.

(Mr. SERRANO asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished ranking member, and I want to make it clear that I agree with the gentleman from New York, the ranking member of the Financial Services Subcommittee, and our colleague, the Delegate from D.C., that the language in the bill does not block either decriminalization of marijuana or the referendum on legalization.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlelady from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur), the ranking member of the Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee.

I yield the gentlewoman an additional 15 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that this package explicitly rejects attempts to prohibit clarifying the definition of navigable waters of the U.S.

However, the CR/Omnibus does contain language relating to core permitting for certain ranching, farming, and silviculture practices. To be clear, this provision does not change current law and preserves the current scope of agricultural exemptions.

If you needed a permit before, you will need to get a permit under this provision; if you didn't need one before, you won't under this provision. I am pleased again that as with most riders, this provision maintains status quo.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fattah), the ranking member of the Commerce-Justice-Science Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Pastor), the ranking member of the Transportation-HUD Subcommittee.

(Mr. PASTOR of Arizona asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), the minority leader of the House.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro), the ranking minority member of the Labor, Health and Human Services Appropriations Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlelady for yielding, and I commend her for her tremendous leadership. With great pride, we point to her as our ranking member on the Appropriations Committee.

I thank you for yielding and for your leadership.

Thank you, Mr. Rogers, for your leadership.

As an appropriator for many years, I know the hard work that goes into putting an appropriations bill together. There was a day when we did them individually. It seems lately we just keep putting them on a bus, an omnibus. That is too bad. But in any event, I appreciate the work you have done to bring this bill to the floor. That is why I was so really heartbroken. I don't think I have ever said that word on the floor of the House. I was heartbroken to see the taint that was placed on this valuable appropriations bill from on high.

I am sorry that we cannot have a full homeland security bill, that is for sure. We knew that was possible. The Speaker says in January we will vote on a full homeland security bill. I hope that that is the case.

But the taint I refer to is what the President described in his letter today as a rider that would amend the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and weaken a critical component of financial system reform aimed at reducing taxpayer risk.

So when people are talking to you about what is in the bill and this or that, I am going to say to you what you are putting your name next to if you choose to vote for this bill. And why I am so appalled--well, I will tell you why.

It was September 2008. Things were happening in the financial services industry. Lehman Brothers, down; Merrill Lynch, down; AIG, whatever. It all happened within a matter of days. I called the Secretary of the Treasury and I said: ``How can we be helpful? What is going on?''

He said: ``It is terrible.''

I said: ``Well, is one of the major financial institutions going down?''

He said: ``No, it is bigger than that. We are in a serious meltdown.''

``Why am I calling you, Mr. Secretary Paulson?''

``Well, the White House wasn't ready for Congress to know about this. But you are the Speaker.''

At the time I was.

``I am the Secretary of the Treasury. You are asking me; I am telling you. We are in a terrible situation.''

So they came to my office that night, the Speaker's Office, House and Senate, Democrats and Republicans. We came together and we heard an appalling meltdown of our financial institutions.

And I said to the Chairman of the Fed, Mr. Ben Bernanke, who was there: ``Mr. Bernanke, what do you think about what the Secretary said?''

He said: ``If we do not act immediately, we will not have an economy by Monday.''

We will not have an economy by Monday. By the policies that were in place at that time, we were taken to a place where we wouldn't have an economy. No commercial paper, no economy by Monday.

Here we are, 2014, going down the same path.

Earlier today, the Republicans put a bill on the floor that would make certain tax incentives permanent and unpaid for. We should be doing revenue reform, but not that way, because the revenue policy of the Bush administration contributed to the Great Recession, taking us close to a depression. So their tax policy jeopardized our economy.

Then, their laissez, laissez, laissez-faire attitudes of no regulation, that took us to a meltdown of our financial institutions to the point where we, the taxpayers, had to rescue the financial institutions to the tune of $700 billion. That is twice as much as in the domestic discretionary spending of the bills that will come before us--two-years' worth of non-defense discretionary domestic spending.

We put provisions in the bill that the American taxpayer would be paid back. But that wasn't enough for the Republicans to vote for it. They voted against it, by and large. It was the Democrats who voted for the TARP, the most difficult vote for Members to vote for and the most politically harmful to them.

So here we are in the House being blackmailed--being blackmailed--to vote for an appropriations bill. I am not asking anybody to vote one way or another. I am just telling you why I would not put the name of my constituents in my district next to a bill that does, as the President says, ``weaken a critical component of financial system reform aimed at reducing taxpayer risk.''

At that time, they accused us of bailing out Wall Street at the expense of Main Street. The public still doesn't understand fully why everybody would benefit from what we had to do. But we shouldn't have had to do that, $700 billion, because of laissez-faire attitudes and trickle-down tax policies of the Bush administration, which got us to that place. Because of initiatives taken by President Obama when he became President, working with the Democratic Congress, with our initial Recovery Act, we were able to reverse some of that, and pull ourselves out of the ditch Republicans took us in.

So here we are today. This should be a day where we say, isn't it too bad we can't do more for the American people, but in the interest of bipartisanship we have put together a bill on the Appropriations Committee that helps meet the needs of the American people. Wouldn't that have been just fine?

Except, popping out of the wilderness comes two things: one, this provision, this provision, as I described, that the President described, and then another one, to make matters worse--to make matters worse--a bill that lifts political contributions to such a height that it is really unimaginable as to why those who put this in there thought that that was a good idea. They told me it was $90,000 for the convention. It turned out to be millions of dollars from a donor or from a family in that regard. So they weren't even on the level of how it was portrayed.

But be that as it may, what is important is what is in the bill. As Congressman Sarbanes said, it is ``quid pro quo.'' You have quid: give Wall Street what they want, relax the responsibility of that.

This is a moral hazard. We are being asked to vote for a moral hazard. Why is this in an appropriations bill? Because it was the price to pay to get an appropriations bill. I was told we couldn't get all these other things that have been described here so beautifully unless we gave Wall Street this gift. And, on top of that, that we gave their donors, high-end donors, all the opportunity in the world to pour money into the process.

Now, maybe the public is right about Washington, D.C. I heard this funny line about Lily Tomlin when she was Ernestine, the operator, when she said: ``Am I communicating with the people that I am speaking to?'' Are we communicating with the people we are speaking to when we say to them it is an important priority and we have to put it in our budget bill that we give donors the opportunity to spend endless money, undermining the confidence the American people have in our political system, at the same time--at the same time--as we say to Wall Street, you can engage in risky activity with your derivatives and the FDIC will ensure your action? That is just plain wrong.

Under the Dodd-Frank Act, if a bank wanted to engage in those risky activities they had to be pushed out to another entity, and that entity could engage in those activities, but they were not insured by the American taxpayer.

With this bill now we are saying the exposure, the recourse, is with the U.S. taxpayer. Just plain wrong--and what is it doing in an appropriations bill, except to have this bill be taken hostage? This is a ransom, this is blackmail. You don't get a bill unless Wall Street gets its taxpayer coverage.

So it is really so sad that something which I respect enormously, the appropriation process--because it is hard. There are so many competing calls on resources, so much that we have to try to invest in the American people, their health, their education, the economic stability of their families, the air they breathe, the water they drink, and how we fund all of that. I have some questions about some of that in this bill, but the fact is it is all a compromise, and it could have been a good compromise. So whatever Members choose to do.

I am enormously disappointed that the White House feels that the only way they can get a bill is to go along with this, and that would be the only reason I think they would say they would sign such a bill that would ``weaken a critical component of financial system reform aimed at reducing taxpayer risk.'' Those are the words in the administration's statement.

I feel sad for the American people today, because we are saying in order for us to invest in the education of our children and all of the responsibilities we have to the American people, we have to pay off Wall Street in addition to that. And I don't begrudge Wall Street, and I don't paint everybody there with the same brush. But what I am saying is the taxpayer should not assume the risk. It is back to the same old Republican formula: prioritize the gain, nationalize the risk. You succeed, it is in your pocket; you fail, the taxpayer pays the bill. It is just not right.

So I think we have a missed opportunity today to have some strong bipartisanship, and there will be bipartisan support for this bill. But the fact is, my colleagues, you are being asked to put your name next to privatizing the gain and nationalizing the risk. You are asked to put your name next to practically unlimited contributions to political campaigns just at a time when we are trying for reform to reduce the role of politics and money and increase the voice of the American people.

So, again, a missed opportunity. But I respect decisions that Members will make because there are equities to be weighed here. But the biggest equity we have is our responsibility to the American people to do the right thing. What was added to this bill, which may be a good bill, what was added to this bill is not the right thing. That is why it has bipartisanship, it has good things in it, but it will not have my support.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 776, I call up the bill (H.R. 83) to require the Secretary of the Interior to assemble a team of technical, policy, and financial experts to address the energy needs of the insular areas of the United States and the Freely Associated States through the development of energy action plans aimed at promoting access to affordable, reliable energy, including increasing use of indigenous clean-energy resources, and for other purposes, with the Senate amendment thereto, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I have a motion at the desk.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that

all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 83 and that I may include tabular material on the same.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I rise today, as we face the expiration of the current continuing resolution, to present the House amendment to the Senate amendment on H.R. 83, legislation to fund the Federal Government for the rest of the current fiscal year.

This amendment prevents a costly and damaging government shutdown while making good government funding and policy decisions and reining in regulatory overreach. It is good for the continuity of vital Federal programs and services; it is good for our economy; and it is good for the American people. In total, this legislation provides $1.013 trillion for the operations of the Federal Government. This total is in line with the terms of the Ryan-Murray budget agreement.

It includes full-year appropriations legislation for 11 of the 12 annual appropriations bills, reflecting the most up-to-date budgetary needs of each agency and department. The Appropriations Committees in both the House and Senate went line by line through all of these bills, prioritizing funding for effective and vital programs, making the tough decisions to cut funding for lower priority programs.

In addition, the measure includes short-term funding for the Department of Homeland Security, holding the funding levels for those programs at current levels. This will ensure that efforts to secure our home front are maintained until February 27 of next year.

This legislation is a compromise--the product of hard-fought negotiations between the House and Senate, with give-and-take from both sides; but at the end of the day, Mr. Speaker, it reflects conservative priorities, keeps our spending in line, and reins in the regulatory overreach that has been hampering our economy.

As such, national security is a top priority in this bill. We provide a total of $554 billion for the Department of Defense, including $64 billion in overseas contingency operations funding to support our troops in the field, to combat ISIL, to train and equip our Iraqi allies, and to counter Russian aggression.

To further assist our economy, we include provisions that put the brakes on regulatory programs that are too intrusive and too burdensome on American businesses. For instance, the legislation prohibits funds for the Army Corps of Engineers to act on two potentially harmful regulations: changing the definition of ``fill material'' and regulating water in certain agricultural areas under the Clean Water Act.

The bill measure prevents the listing of the Sage Grouse on the endangered species list--a premature action that would have severe economic consequences on Western States, especially; and the bill protects job creators from onerous regulatory burdens by amending Dodd- Frank swaps push-out rules.

This bill also demonstrates, Mr. Speaker, fiscal restraint. It cuts $60 million from the EPA. It provides no funding for high-speed rail, the President's Race to the Top initiative, or UNESCO or IMF. No new funding is included for ObamaCare, and the bill holds the line on funding for the agency most responsible for implementing that law at Health and Human Services.

For the IRS, the bill cuts the agency $345 million below last year, and it includes language to put a stop to improper behavior by prohibiting the targeting of groups based on their political beliefs, prohibiting the White House from ordering the IRS to determine the tax- exempt status of an organization, and from funding inappropriate videos or conferences.

This legislation is the product of the bipartisan and bicameral cooperation that the American people called for at the voting booths last month. Passage of this bill will show our people that we can and will govern responsibly, rise above inaction, and work together on their behalf.

I would have preferred, as I am sure all of us would have, that we would be considering each of the 12 appropriations bills under regular order--the old-fashioned way. This is the way it should operate. In the House, as you know, our committee passed out 11 of the 12 bills. The floor passed seven of the bills, and it would have passed more, but we realized the Senate was not going to act on any of them and did not; so five of the bills were left in the lurch because the Senate would not consider any of the bills.

We face a very tight deadline now, and we have no choice but to try to put together an omnibus spending bill aggregating all 12 bills into one. I would have preferred separately, but the Senate blocked the way. If we do nothing, we will be turning our backs on our constitutional duty and on the American people.

Mr. Speaker, before I close, I want to take a moment to recognize some people who made today possible.

First of all, the staff. We have had about a month to put together this enormous bill--with thousands of items--in all 12 subcommittees. We had great negotiations then with the Senate, but it was the work of the staff, of course, that enables us to be here today. I want to thank the staff on both sides of the aisle, who worked so hard to make this happen. I would like to call names, but I am afraid I would leave out somebody important, so I want to thank the staff for all of their wonderful, laborious work.

I will single out Will Smith, the chief clerk of the committee, who has guided the staff through this enormous process, who, I think, did a wonderful, marvelous job. I want to thank Will Smith, especially, and all of the staff for their great work in leading up to today.

Now I want to thank the members of the committee. They have all had a part in making this bill up--each subcommittee, each chairman of the subcommittee, each of the members of the subcommittees, who fought long and hard to ensure that we had the best bill before us today that we could have.

Notably, the ranking member of the committee, Mrs. Nita Lowey, with whom we share this responsibility, has been a tremendous asset to us in the procedure leading up to today. I want to thank her personally for the great work that she did.

I also want to acknowledge, Mr. Speaker, six members of the committee who are moving on to greener pastures, making new chapters in their lives. They have been enormous helpers on the committee. They have chaired subcommittees, and they have worked long and hard on every bill that we have produced. We certainly hate to see them go, but they are writing a new chapter. I want to recognize Jack Kingston for his service, Frank Wolf, Tom Latham, Jim Moran, Ed Pastor, and Bill Owens. All of those six are moving on. I want to thank them for their service.

It is appropriate that their final vote on the House floor will be on an appropriate Appropriations Committee bill--funding the entire government. This Nation is a better place because of their service, and I want to thank all of them for their contributions to the committee and to the House and to the people of this country over their combined 120 years of service.

I now call on the Members of the House--Republicans and Democrats alike--to support this legislation. Keep the government open. It is a good bill. It is bipartisan; it is bicameral; it was negotiated in good faith on both sides of the Capitol and on both sides of the aisle. Most importantly, Mr. Speaker, this bill is necessary, so I urge the Members to vote ``yes.''

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Frelinghuysen), the very distinguished and hardworking chairman of the Appropriations Defense Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Iowa, Mr. Tom Latham, who is retiring.

He chairs the Transportation-HUD Appropriations Subcommittee and has been a stalwart help over the years on this committee and in the Congress in service to the country, so I guess for the last time he will be giving us a great oration.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Idaho (Mr. Simpson), the distinguished chairman of the Energy and Water Subcommittee on Appropriations.

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire the time remaining?

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Kingston), the distinguished chairman of the Labor-HHS Subcommittee on Appropriations who is retiring, leaving this body. He has done remarkable work on this subcommittee. He chaired a very difficult subcommittee with great distinction.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Crenshaw),

the chairman of the Financial Services Subcommittee on Appropriations.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert), the distinguished chairman of the Interior Subcommittee on Appropriations.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Fortenberry), a member of our committee.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Congress' misguided rush towards austerity has hurt our economy, slashing critical investments that create jobs and make us more competitive. Discretionary spending, which represents only one-third of the budget, has borne a disproportionate share of cuts. The December budget agreement and this bill set us on a path to fulfilling our basic responsibility of annual spending bills.

Chairman Rogers, I commend your leadership. It has been a delight working with you, and I too look forward to a holiday season where we won't be in constant contact. Thank you. It has been a pleasure.

This bill makes key investments that will bolster job creation and economic growth. We should not have Federal furloughs again this year. Education, Head Start, new pre-K initiatives will help working families and restore teaching slots, and infrastructure investments will support construction jobs and safety upgrades.

Other vital priorities fell short. It is incredibly disappointing this package doesn't restore unemployment benefits for the long-term unemployed.

In addition, I was very pleased that we received $1 billion more than last year for biomedical research at the National Institutes of Health, but it is still funded below the 2012 level, forcing scientists to shelve promising research.

By not authorizing a change to the quota for IMF, the International Monetary Fund, we neglect the United States' vital role in the global economy. It is an important tool to promote international financial stability and support U.S. jobs, exports and markets.

This is not the bill that I would have written, but it is the result of a negotiation that required significant compromise and protected the appropriations process from political warfare by dropping most of the new contentious riders.

Finally, I would like to praise the tireless work of David Pomerantz and all of the appropriations staff on both sides of the aisle. This bill was a huge undertaking, possible only with the hard work of such dedicated staff, including one of our longtime professionals who will soon be leaving the committee.

On behalf of the entire Appropriations Committee, I thank David Reich for his 30 years of service to the House and 17 years of exceptional contributions to the full Appropriations Committee, the Labor-H and other subcommittees.

Thank you, and we wish you Godspeed. Good luck.

Now, at this time, before I close, I also want to recognize Trudi Terry, the Chief Clerk of Debates. As I understand it, unfortunately, she will be retiring and go on to other things, and we thank you for your service to the House.

Now, in conclusion, I wish we had completed this process last October, when this fiscal year actually started, but better late than never.

The President's budget will likely arrive late, given Congress' tardiness in completing our work for fiscal year 2014, but I do hope that the bipartisan spirit with which the omnibus agreement has been reached will be preserved in the cycle to come. I will support this omnibus and work in the coming year to address its shortcomings.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur), the ranking member of the Energy and Water Committee.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky), the ranking member of the Defense Subcommittee.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano), the ranking member of the Financial Services Committee.

(Mr. SERRANO asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro), the ranking member of the Labor, Health and Human Services Subcommittee.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran), the ranking member of the Interior Subcommittee.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price), the ranking member of the Homeland Security Subcommittee.

Madam Speaker, I am delighted to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fattah), the ranking member of the Commerce, Justice and Science Subcommittee.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Bishop), the ranking member of the Military Construction and Veterans Administration.

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz), the ranking member of the Legislative Branch Subcommittee.

Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee), a member of the Appropriations Committee.

I yield 10 seconds to the gentlewoman.

Madam Speaker, in closing this debate, I want to use the opportunity again to thank the chairman, Mr. Rogers, to thank Senator Mikulski and Senator Shelby on the other side of the aisle. It really has been a pleasure for me to work with Chairman Rogers and all of the ranking members on both sides of the aisle to produce this bill that I think we can be very, very proud of.

I also want to thank, again, the Appropriations staff on both sides of the aisle who are looking forward to a good night's sleep tonight. They have worked incredibly hard through the holidays; but because of them and because of the partnership, we are very proud to present this bill.

As we look forward to 2015, we will have more time to consider the suggestions from all of our colleagues in working on this bill. I know that we will continue to invest in programs and projects that strengthen our economy and create jobs.

Although we could not include it in this bill, I do hope that we will have the opportunity very, very soon to pass an extension of unemployment insurance.

Madam Speaker, the great ranking member, Mr. Farr, has just returned. I yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Farr).

Madam Speaker, I would like to inquire as to how much time I have remaining?

Madam Speaker, in closing, I would like to thank again the distinguished Chairman Rogers and all the Appropriations Committee.

I would like to say another word in following up with our ranking member, Mr. Farr.

I too reentered government after I raised my children, and I ran the anti-poverty program in New York State. I felt so passionately that what most people want is a hand up, not a hand out. This is why the temporary extension of unemployment insurance is so important.

Just this week, I met with a man, 52 years old, a licensed electrician. He said for the last 10 years he wanted to work every day, as he always did before, but he never worked a complete year because in my district, in Westchester and Rockland, there is 40 percent unemployment in the construction trades.

So I would ask my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, let's pass this extension of unemployment insurance and make sure as we consider these bills next year we focus on investments, strengthen the economy, create jobs, and make sure that we give every person that opportunity to fulfill their dreams.

I yield back the balance of my time.